Is Firefly better off cancelled?

[BigJake]

To me, the show was better off exploring life after a revolution gone wrong, focused on a group of people finding home in the midst of an imperfect future. It being cancelled kept the show sticking to what made it work.

I loved the cast and the concept was refreshing in some ways, but I agree its cancellation was a blessing in disguise. It would have been nice to see certain storylines get to play to their conclusion (I'm fond of the movie but its attempt to jam all that resolution into two hours largely failed), but after that it could've gotten stale pretty quickly.

Also, for all that I'm fond of it, there were huge ways in which the execution was flawed. In particular, the Western metaphor was too literal by half (and the Civil War theme so on-the-nose that it bore an uncomfortable family resemblance to neo-Confederate Romanticism in Spaaace), to the point where it literally had them carrying cattle from planet to planet at one point. I was sad that it got cancelled but not surprised.

 

[urbandefault]

Aw man, now I'll never get that song out of my head.

"Jaaaaaaayne . . . "

 

[fireproof78]

Serenity completely killed it for me.

I'm curious as to what put you off. I mean, I know what didn't work for me but I always like hearing different perspectives.

For me, the film pushed River a little too far and too fast, and killed Wash off rather tragically with no payoff. And, yes, I know, not all death must mean something, and meaningless death might play to the theme of the film (what are you fighting for? Do you believe in it?) but I think it fell rather flat.

I also wish that the Operative's connection to Blue Sun could have been more understood.

 

[EnderAKH]

Things we missed out on when Firefly was cancelled

Morena Bacarin leaves the cast in season 3 for her own spin-off series, HBO's "Inara." Saffron, played by the lovely Christina Hendricks, joins the cast as Mal's new love interest causing the internet fans to divide into two camps.

In season 5, Mal and crew join the Alliance to fight it from the inside. Serenity is traded in for one of the Alliance Skyscraper cruisers.

Mal's younger brother Dusty, played by former child star Jonathon Lipnicki, joins the cast in season 6. Some fans embrace the character, while many others consider him "whiny."

Season 4 contains an episode hailed by fans as one of the series very best. After Mal is blinded in a Reaver attack, the rest of the episode is shown from his point of view: just a black screen with voice overs. Says director Joss Whedon in an interview, "I wanted to push myself as a Director. I didn't want to keep falling back on the crutch of 'Over, over, 2-shot."

During the hiatus between seasons 3 & 4, series star Nathan Fillion use
the time to star in the new live action film version of Hanna Barbara's the Jetsons. Says Fillion in an interview, "I love doing Firefly and working with (series creator) Joss Whedon, but the Jetsons is allowing me to stretch my acting muscles and do something a little different."

Season 2 sees David Boreanaz, star of Whedon's recently cancelled Angel, star as the president of the Blue Sun corporation. In season 3, former Buffy co-star Nicholas Brendon was cast as the evil President of the Alliance. When asked, Brendon was quoted as saying "Who wouldn't do it? I got promoted from hunky yet witty best friend to head of the galaxy. Go me!"

In season 6, three words: Firefly the Musical

 

[RJDiogenes]

For me, the film pushed River a little too far and too fast, and killed Wash off rather tragically with no payoff. And, yes, I know, not all death must mean something, and meaningless death might play to the theme of the film (what are you fighting for? Do you believe in it?) but I think it fell rather flat.

Wash and Book. Shocking deaths of major characters are shocking. And pointless. And wasteful.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

...and yet perhaps truer to reality, which can seem randomly cruel?

 

[Mudd]

Serenity is a great movie. It's a shame that it didn't succeed; we might actually have seen a few less budget-bloated but effective science fiction movies of the kind. The budget range at which it was produced would work well for Star Trek, for example. Instead of that, the studio's experience with the film - which was a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy - reinforced the common wisdom that it's not worth doing space movies unless you Go Big.

 

[fireproof78]

Wash and Book. Shocking deaths of major characters are shocking. And pointless. And wasteful.

I think Book's death works of the pointlessness of death, but Wash's straddles the line of pointless and narratively unnecessary.

 

[Takeru]

Do you all remember that single scene in the pilot episode when the crew is threatened by the Reavers and Inara pulls out a case with a syringe in it? Well.. as with most things Whedon he didn't do it just to do it or fill the episode. In a story that was planned this syringe contained a drug that a Companion could take if she expected to be raped and it would kill the rapist after the act. One episode would have the Reavers kidnap Inara and when the crew got her back they would encounter the Reavers ship with all Reavers dead and only Inara alive on board.. think about that for a moment

That sounds absolutely awful.

"If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins into their clothing – and if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order."

So I guess Inara would have been lucky that she wasn't mutilated before being gangraped? Unless they were planning to do a story arc that fundamentally changed her character this isn't a good idea.

 

[JD]

I loved Serenity. Book and Wash's deaths were sad, but I thought they both worked with the story being told.

 

[FPAlpha]

That sounds absolutely awful.

"If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins into their clothing – and if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order."

So I guess Inara would have been lucky that she wasn't mutilated before being gangraped? Unless they were planning to do a story arc that fundamentally changed her character this isn't a good idea.

We will never know and as brutal as that storyline sounds it says that the show wouldn't shy away from deep trauma and shock as it sometimes happens in real life, especially if you live a life at the edges of civilization. It's also part of why i adore the show.. these people don't always win. They have to fight every day and sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. The show starts off with a huge loss for Mal.. something that shattered his core and changed him. Remember the small scene at the Battle of Serenity Valley where he kisses his cross before going into action? Fast forward several years "You're welcome on my ship, god ain't.."

As we all know Whedon is a big fan of shocking sudden developments (partly i think for show drama purposes but also because it opens up new storylines) - having Buffy kill Angel in Season 2, killing off Fred and replacing the character with Illyria, Wash, Book and many other secondary characters so that storyline with Inara fits right in. I doubt it would have been a standalone episode and everything back to normal in the next episode. It probably would have played out for at least that season if not longer.

 

[fireproof78]

We will never know and as brutal as that storyline sounds it says that the show wouldn't shy away from deep trauma and shock as it sometimes happens in real life, especially if you live a life at the edges of civilization. It's also part of why i adore the show.. these people don't always win. They have to fight every day and sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. The show starts off with a huge loss for Mal.. something that shattered his core and changed him. Remember the small scene at the Battle of Serenity Valley where he kisses his cross before going into action? Fast forward several years "You're welcome on my ship, god ain't.."

If there is a facet of Serenity that I did like it was Mal's character arc. Mal went in to an incredibly dark place after Inara left, to the point that they are barely surviving. He even shoots two unarmed people.

At the end, though, he has a willingness to die for the sake of what he believes in. Certainly he is a long way from his more religious self at Serenity Valley, but he has a moment where he needs to stop just surviving, and believe in a cause again.

For all that I hold against Serenity, Mal's arc is definitely one that I find enjoyable.

 

[Kor]

Funny, a lot of "man on the street" discussions I have had with casual TV viewers over the years indicated that they couldn't stand the TV show, but enjoyed the movie!

Kor

 

[fireproof78]

Funny, a lot of "man on the street" discussions I have had with casual TV viewers over the years indicated that they couldn't stand the TV show, but enjoyed the movie!

Kor

I definitely recall that as well, at least from my readings online and trying to show people the show and the film.

Personally, I think the film is ok, but it works better within the context of the show. However, having read several of the BTS notes from Whedon and Minear I think there was a lot more that could have been done, even with one more season.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Mal's younger brother Dusty, played by former child star Jonathon Lipnicki, joins the cast in season 6. Some fans embrace the character, while many others consider him "whiny."

I always thought that Mal had a secret twin brother named Ben (the word "Mal" is a prefix, meaning something that's bad; conversely, "Ben" means good. Example: a Benediction is a blessing, whereas a Malediction is a curse). And while Mal Reynolds was obviously your scruffy, ne'er-do-well Browncoat rebel, Ben is a privileged, upstanding, straight-arrow, possibly smug, Alliance officer.

With Nathan Fillion in a dual role, of course.

That said, I am also curious what it would look like if existing Firefly episodes were retold from the perspective of the Alliance. Might get a rather interesting result, ya? Fans have been conditioned to believe that the Alliance is just a black-hat "evil empire", like the one from SW, even though Joss Whedon himself has said that the Alliance is not completely evil (I believe his specific analogy was that sometimes the Alliance is good, like the USA in World War II; other times not so good, like the USA in Vietnam). So I wonder what would happen if the Alliance got its say, so to speak. We're supposed to think that Independents=good and Alliance=evil, but that's only because the main characters are all browncoats...

Or to put it another way: The independents weren't the only ones who suffered at Serenity Valley, were they?

 

[Timby]

I'm curious as to what put you off. I mean, I know what didn't work for me but I always like hearing different perspectives.

For me, it starts with how unbelievably teal and orange the entire film is, and how blandly everything is shot (but the latter is what comes with having Whedon direct a movie). Visually, it's just very boring, and considering that film is a visual medium, that's a huge knock right there.

Some of the dialogue is particularly cringe-worthy; the opening scene with the Operative and the doctor giving the most ham-fisted, clumsy exposition about the Tams' backstory is just awful.

In general, the movie tries to pack entirely too much story into too short a running time. It just doesn't work for me at all.

 

[Reverend]

I think Book's death works of the pointlessness of death, but Wash's straddles the line of pointless and narratively unnecessary.

Wash's death may seem random and unnecessary but it actually serves a very specific narrative function: Joss wanted people to buy into the idea that nobody was safe and any and all of the cast could die in the finale. If you watch the "last stand" sequence in this context you'll see there's a moment for (from memory) at least four of the remaining characters (not counting Mal) that makes it look like they're done. Kaylee takes a bad hit, Simon is shot, Zoe zones out for a second as she goes almost suicidally at the Reavers Terminator style and River dives right into the middle of them and for a hot second seems to sacrifice herself to get the door closed and retrieve Simon's medical bag. (I don't recall if there's a similar thing for Jayne or Inara, but I haven't watched the movie in years.)

It's easy to look back in retrospect as feel at easy knowing they all make it, but if you're watching it for the first time, you're in the moment, you know there's no TV show for these people to go back to, maybe no sequel and a writer-director notorious for killing off his most beloved characters, you believe that they can all die, thank mostly to how casually Wash was iced not five minutes ago.

 

[The Old Mixer]

"You're welcome on my ship, god ain't.."

"Boat."

 

[RJDiogenes]

...and yet perhaps truer to reality, which can seem randomly cruel?

True, but it's not reality. It's Art. And Art must be more carefully crafted than reality.

I think Book's death works of the pointlessness of death, but Wash's straddles the line of pointless and narratively unnecessary.

Maybe one could be justified that way in context, but not both in the same movie. Plus the fact that the Shocking Death of a Major Character trope has become way too much of an easy cop out in contemporary fiction.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Looking forward to the happier remakes of "Saving Private Ryan"*, "Hamlet"**, and "War and Peace"*** in that case.

ETA RIP:
* Miller, Horvath, Melllish, Caparzo, Jackson, and Wade.
** Hamlet, Polonius, Laertes, Claudius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Ophelia, and Gertrude. I suppose Yorick doesn't really count.
*** Prince Andrei Bolkonsky, his wife Lise and his father Nikolai, Anatole and Yelena Kuragin, and Ilya and Petya Rostov.